Poe v. Ullman (1961)
Harlan’s Dissent: Wrong for the state to regulate by criminal law the intimacy of a marriage. Said rational basis not enough, needed “a closer scrutiny and stronger justification” for the statute. Harlan says that there are rights beyond what the specific wording of the Bill of Rights says—it is a rational continuum. Cites Skinner, Bolling (D.C. companion case to Brown, education isn’t an enumerated right, to demonstrate that Due Process applied to the 5th and 14th Amendments.)
Facts: Women brought suit b/c CT statute criminalizing birth control prevented them from receiving advice regarding their medical needs. The court ducked the statute when it first came in conflict in 1943 b/c said the doctor, who brought the case, had no standing. After this, activity trying to liberalize birth control information clinics in CT and MA.
Holding: The time was not ripe to hear this issue. Statute grew out of movement out of Victorian backlash against the industrialization and the impact that was having on gender roles and the family.
Harlan’s Dissent: Wrong for the state to regulate by criminal law the intimacy of a marriage. Said rational basis not enough, needed “a closer scrutiny and stronger justification” for the statute. Harlan says that there are rights beyond what the specific wording of the Bill of Rights says—it is a rational continuum. Cites Skinner, Bolling (D.C. companion case to Brown, education isn’t an enumerated right, to demonstrate that Due Process applied to the 5th and 14th Amendments.)
- Says if we affirm marriage affirmatively, then that is something that deserves protection. Right of privacy connected w/the marital bedroom.
No comments:
Post a Comment